|
Internet Webguy posted:Well, I'm convinced, they really did make the place better. All it needed was a nice trench of human feces. Really ties the preserve together.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
Angela Christine posted:No, I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm saying that if you believe that that sort of natural property rights, then their actions make sense. If you own what you can hold, then the natives don't own it because they failed to hold it. It is internally consistent. Their actions make sense to them. That sounds like textbook Devil advocacy to me. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Oooh, what are my NationStates options for responding?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:I get the feeling the only "camping" these guys have ever done is in a trailer or motorhome. Digging the latrine is the second thing you do, first being choosing the site and setting up your tent and then sticking the shitter where the prevailing winds won't blow the smell into camp. The fact that they didn't bring sufficient food, clothing and supplies also testifies to this fact. Arguably a few of them probably knew how to properly rough it, but the majority of them including the ones in charge probably didn't know how and were too egotistical to defer to people who knew better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Thanks for this. I saw the first article in this series and loved it (the federal budget shutdown, I think it was?) but then couldn't find it again. Always wanted to go back and read the later entries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:That sounds like textbook Devil advocacy to me. Trying to understand a different worldview doesn't imply that you think it has a point. Otherwise my books on Aztec history would be advocating human sacrifice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Arguably a few of them probably knew how to properly rough it, but the majority of them including the ones in charge probably didn't know how and were too egotistical to defer to people who knew better. Well, there was also the fact that they honestly expected the Feds to come down and martyr them all before supplies became an issue.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Trying to understand a different worldview doesn't imply that you think it has a point. Otherwise my books on Aztec history would be advocating human sacrifice. Why do you like killing other human beings so much? What's wrong with you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
prefect posted:Why do you like killing other human beings so much? What's wrong with you? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Trying to understand a different worldview doesn't imply that you think it has a point. Otherwise my books on Aztec history would be advocating human sacrifice. You don't have to agree with a point to be a devil's advocate for it. My argument is that someone's hollow justification rooted purely in fantasy is something nobody can ever advocate for. Moreover, advocating for it - even, no, especially if you disagree with it - lends it legitimacy to people sympathetic to the siege. Sometimes, it's really not worth arguing the other side's point. You don't play devil's advocate for SovCits, you roll your eyes at them and move on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Trying to understand a different worldview doesn't imply that you think it has a point. Otherwise my books on Aztec history would be advocating human sacrifice. One of the big problems with this process is that people don't keep the proper distance between the meanings of "understanding" and "sympathy" or "empathy." Like someone can understand the grievances of these fucks in the sense that they know their historical roots and what they mean with their coded bullshit language, but that isn't to say someone holds any positive feelings toward their crusade, they can just read the writing, as it were. Too often it's taken to mean one has some sympathy for them or empathize with them, and that isn't always correct.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:You don't have to agree with a point to be a devil's advocate for it. My argument is that someone's hollow justification rooted purely in fantasy is something nobody can ever advocate for. Moreover, advocating for it - even, no, especially if you disagree with it - lends it legitimacy to people sympathetic to the siege. Sometimes, it's really not worth arguing the other side's point. He's just trying to understand their thought process, and i think he did a fine enough job, no reason to be weird about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:He's just trying to understand their thought process, and i think he did a fine enough job, no reason to be weird about it. If you try to understand the way other people think, you're just as bad as they are. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:The huge mess these people left is not surprising, but it does go to show that these people with all their focus on chores and poo poo, none one will clean up. I remember reading an early description of the occupiers as having "a strong focus on daily chores"; i'm sure none of those chores involved cleaning, just chopping wood, clearing brush, and other manly tasks, and nothing about cleaning up, becuase that's womens work. To actually play Devils Advocate a bit - the trench was dug after almost everyone else had left, and was dug by a handful of dummies who weren't really involved in the leadership of the group. I doubt Ammon was taking good care of the Reserve, but the idiots with the poop trench are a few steps removed from the people talking about caretaking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Trying to understand a different worldview doesn't imply that you think it has a point. Otherwise my books on Aztec history would be advocating human sacrifice. The definition of devil's advocate is someone who argues a position they don't necessarily agree with in order to understand the issue. Sometimes people use it as cover for concern trolling, I suppose, but the literal meaning is exactly what you are doing and there's nothing wrong with that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Angela Christine posted:No, I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm saying that if you believe that that sort of natural property rights, then their actions make sense. If you own what you can hold, then the natives don't own it because they failed to hold it. It is internally consistent. Their actions make sense to them. Well and "productive" is a loaded word that has no real, objective meaning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:To actually play Devils Advocate a bit - the trench was dug after almost everyone else had left, and was dug by a handful of dummies who weren't really involved in the leadership of the group. I'm still amused that they somehow managed to fill up said trench to a noticeable degree between the four of them. Though to counteract your point: the idiots did use BLM equipment to pave a short stretch of road in an area to make a convenient shortcut while Bundy and Co. were still there. They just said "Yeah, we're driving through this spot a lot and there's no road or trail here...oh, hey, we've got what we need to throw asphalt on the ground right here in this motorpool!" with no forethought or anything. So no, Ammon wasn't taking good care of the reserve at all. Ammon just realized that a poop-trench would make them even more of a laughing stock than they already were so they just decided to over-stress the septic system instead. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Could someone remake the HENRY offenses gif, but for the BUNDY militia people?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
What's really funny is that AFAIK the toilets onsite were still functioning. They were using the "we're just camping!" defense but I've stayed in a semi-developed campsite in a national forest and you don't run around and poo poo by people's tents when there's an available john. Camp away, but poop in the pooping place  Can't wait until the trials and the USA asks why they literally poo poo where they ate when there was a functioning toilet 20 yds away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
Weembles posted:The definition of devil's advocate is someone who argues a position they don't necessarily agree with in order to understand the issue. Sometimes people use it as cover for concern trolling, I suppose, but the literal meaning is exactly what you are doing and there's nothing wrong with that. Explaining someone's reasoning and arguing for it are two separate things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
pillsburysoldier posted:Could someone remake the HENRY offenses gif, but for the BUNDY militia people? Sentence: Death by scurvy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:One of the big problems with this process is that people don't keep the proper distance between the meanings of "understanding" and "sympathy" or "empathy." Like someone can understand the grievances of these fucks in the sense that they know their historical roots and what they mean with their coded bullshit language, but that isn't to say someone holds any positive feelings toward their crusade, they can just read the writing, as it were. That is why communication skills are important though. Depending on how one words their statements, it can sound like they are sympathetic or empathetic, as opposed to simply having knowledge of the situation. Saying "I understand why the KKK feels the way they do about black people", especially in plain text, is going to have a very bad implication. Which is why a more knowledgeable and aware person would say, "I understand the history behind the KKK's beliefs", or at least "I know why the KKK feels the way they do", since they are distancing themselves with language from those beliefs. In English, at least in America, simply saying "I understand" as a response to someone who is airing a grievance is usually meant as a (somewhat shallow) show of support. So when discussing subjects that involve heinous beliefs and acts, you really have to be careful of phrasing and context. Spending the few extra seconds to explain how and what they understand can go a long way to prevent miscommunication
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Pretty sure any claim they had to caring about the artifacts went out the window when they bulldozed a road to through the place and declared that the natives had "lost their right to them" because something something 'Murrica. I said it earlier in the thread, but the next time a bunch of these assholes get the bright idea that they can simply take over federal land it should be 100% legal for any local tribe to "reclaim" that land by any means necessary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Abner Cadaver II posted:Cliven Bundy's ranching method actually regressed from domestication back to (an incompetent, lovely version of) the sort of semi-nomadic herding the Saami practice with reindeer. Sounds like he's spending the minimum possible money and time on it, so probably. Goodpancakes posted:Why are the Bundy body guards hanging around? Like does he pay those guys? What the gently caress They're not paid (though he probably let them live on his land for free), they just agree with his political views. Also, because he "won" his battle with the BLM, they thought he was a hero. McNerd posted:Finally, all the above is about what's happened since the 2014 standoff. What about the fact he has been illegally making GBS threads all over Nevada since *1993*, and in defiance of a court order since *1998*? Why couldn't we have had the same standoff in 1999 and Bundy's trial in 2001? Same reason the IRS doesn't kick in the door and shoot your dog if you're a day late filing your taxes. The justice system is slow (and deliberate refusal to respect the court tends to slow it even further as the system scrambles to try to prevent a complete idiot from totally screwing himself), failure to pay fees is of relatively little importance on the scale of the grand federal government, the government would much prefer to negotiate an agreement with you to eventually get you paid up and in compliance instead of punishing you for your misdeeds when it comes to things like this, and there's no pressing need to quickly handle it since the eventual punitive fees will do plenty to pay for fixing any permanent damage one jackass cattle rancher can do. This is why tax avoidance scams can survive - their followers can stick to them for years before they start facing consequences for non-payment, and it's not unusual for the gurus who sell them to keep going for a decade or more before they start to find themselves in serious trouble. Cliven didn't really start racking up felonies until the standoff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Same reason the IRS doesn't kick in the door and shoot your dog if you're a day late filing your taxes. The justice system is slow (and deliberate refusal to respect the court tends to slow it even further as the system scrambles to try to prevent a complete idiot from totally screwing himself), failure to pay fees is of relatively little importance on the scale of the grand federal government, the government would much prefer to negotiate an agreement with you to eventually get you paid up and in compliance instead of punishing you for your misdeeds when it comes to things like this, and there's no pressing need to quickly handle it since the eventual punitive fees will do plenty to pay for fixing any permanent damage one jackass cattle rancher can do. This is why tax avoidance scams can survive - their followers can stick to them for years before they start facing consequences for non-payment, and it's not unusual for the gurus who sell them to keep going for a decade or more before they start to find themselves in serious trouble. Cliven didn't really start racking up felonies until the standoff. I have only one complaint about this paragraph: Cliven and his family have proven that there is nothing you can do to save the complete idiots. The government and justice system does try (...provided said idiot is white of course, the last thing I'd try to argue is that our justice system isn't racist as hell) but they can only really save mostly idiots, complete idiots are just beyond hope.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
I had never read the details about how Bundy "manages" his cattle. These people are filthy vagrants who defile nature and animals on purpose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
On top of what Main Paineframe said, I should emphasize that I still think that the apparent submission of the federal government at Bundy Ranch may have been a direct cause for the Malheur occupation, even if I understand why the feds didn't want to turn it into another Waco. By essentially surrendering, backing off, and letting Bundy keep openly breaking the law to avoid a fight, they accidentally sent a message to right-wing militia types: "The federal government is weak! As long as you get a couple hundred guys with guns to intimidate them, they won't even try to touch you!" So of course, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne (the two ringleaders of the incident who performed the initial planning and asked Sheriff Ward for their protest permission to provide cover for the occupation) were looking for a new cause to take up and they came across the Hammonds being ordered back into prison. Standing their ground with AR-15s and Tapco'd up SKS's and WASRs worked back in 2014. Who's to say it wouldn't work a second time? For all we know, the occupation could have still been going on today if the leadership didn't get cocky and drive off by themselves down an isolated stretch of road. Or the arrests and death of Finicum could have caused the remaining leadership figures like Blaine Cooper (or Jon Ritzheimer if he hadn't fled back to Arizona already, or any of the other people like Ryan Payne or Ryan Bundy if they didn't try to join Ammon and Cavalier on their drive) to double down and become openly hostile instead of panicking and fleeing. Or the Malheur 4 could have panicked or been crazy enough to start shooting when the FBI rolled in and gotten themselves gunned down in their tents to become martyrs. Or Cliven Bundy could have been too smart to leave his ranch for Portland (or at least too smart to fly commercial and leave himself open for a pathetically easy ambush), which would leave the main leader figure in the current sovereign citizen movement still active and free. The point I'm trying to make is that even though the FBI's long con worked, there were a lot of points where it could have gone wrong. The smashing success they made in ending the occupation nearly bloodlessly and capturing Cliven Bundy was reliant on all the important figures repeatedly making stupid and cowardly decisions: getting cocky and leaving the refuge in big groups outside of populated areas, leaving the refuge individually back to their own homes where they could be found and picked up within 24 hours, freaking out and giving up instead of sitting down and preparing for war, etc. If the militia didn't act as predicted, it could have created a lot of martyrs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:On top of what Main Paineframe said, I should emphasize that I still think that the apparent submission of the federal government at Bundy Ranch may have been a direct cause for the Malheur occupation, even if I understand why the feds didn't want to turn it into another Waco. By essentially surrendering, backing off, and letting Bundy keep openly breaking the law to avoid a fight, they accidentally sent a message to right-wing militia types: "The federal government is weak! As long as you get a couple hundred guys with guns to intimidate them, they won't even try to touch you!" So of course, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne (the two ringleaders of the incident who performed the initial planning and asked Sheriff Ward for their protest permission to provide cover for the occupation) were looking for a new cause to take up and they came across the Hammonds being ordered back into prison. Standing their ground with AR-15s and Tapco'd up SKS's and WASRs worked back in 2014. Who's to say it wouldn't work a second time? Yeah, while I understand waiting until they could really compile a case, I don't see why they didn't just do a night raid on the Bundy compound a few months after when Cliven's main supporter base had dwindled down to a half dozen people. It really is a miracle that nobody was hurt, but I suspect that the damage at the wildlife refuge is going to turn out to have been pretty serious, pretty expensive, and had they not done the raid in the middle of winter in the North, it probably would have been devastating to the local wildlife. The federal government was irresponsible in letting this criminal and his movement go for so long, and it's not the first time that ignoring a right wing militia (or similar far right group) has caused problems in this country, look at the OKC bombings or what Warren Jeffs was getting away with for decades. There is simply no interest among federal authorities in pursuing right wing extremism, they all want to avoid "another waco" or "another ruby ridge" so they just let this poo poo go until they can't ignore it anymore. The part that stings the worst is to see how the government responds to leftist protest movements with extreme, jack-booted prejudice. The government will bust rear end to break up hacky sack in central park (OWS) or teargas BLM protestors but a group of crazy right wingers talk about actively overthrowing the government and point guns at federal agents and make national level threats and calls for revolt and the FBI doesn't do anything about it until a month after they take over a government building, and even then, probably only because they started following BLM employees home and threatening their lives in public. I don't know if it's the post-McCarthy conservative leanings, the general right wing nature of American police forces or what but it's infuriating to see these guys get away with what they have when the police have spent the last two years brutally suppressing protests about violence against minorities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:On top of what Main Paineframe said, I should emphasize that I still think that the apparent submission of the federal government at Bundy Ranch may have been a direct cause for the Malheur occupation, even if I understand why the feds didn't want to turn it into another Waco. By essentially surrendering, backing off, and letting Bundy keep openly breaking the law to avoid a fight, they accidentally sent a message to right-wing militia types: "The federal government is weak! As long as you get a couple hundred guys with guns to intimidate them, they won't even try to touch you!" So of course, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne (the two ringleaders of the incident who performed the initial planning and asked Sheriff Ward for their protest permission to provide cover for the occupation) were looking for a new cause to take up and they came across the Hammonds being ordered back into prison. Standing their ground with AR-15s and Tapco'd up SKS's and WASRs worked back in 2014. Who's to say it wouldn't work a second time? How prescient, if the FBI hadn't been right about it's strategy then it would have been wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:How prescient, if the FBI hadn't been right about it's strategy then it would have been wrong. If this elaborate series of events was all planned by the FBI then I would like to meet these ESP-possessing agents and learn about the source of their power.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:If this elaborate series of events was all planned by the FBI then I would like to meet these ESP-possessing agents and learn about the source of their power. You could just read the countless posts in this thread predicting that was exactly what was going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:If this elaborate series of events was all planned by the FBI then I would like to meet these ESP-possessing agents and learn about the source of their power. It's pretty simple. "Eventually they're going to do something good and stupid, and that's when we'll grab 'em."
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:How prescient, if the FBI hadn't been right about it's strategy then it would have been wrong. What a meaningful contribution to the thread. My point is that the FBI's success was highly reliant on luck and some really loving stupid behavior by the occupiers. Things like the leadership all driving off in one isolated group to be scooped up and Cliven Bundy being convinced (by Michele Fiore of all people, who as we witnessed is hardly an awesome negotiator) to fly commercial to Portland where he could be safely arrested were incredibly lucky events that were the result of incredibly boneheaded thinking by the bad guys. The plan was reliant on the militia repeatedly making some of the most stupid decisions they possibly could in their situation. If they weren't so spectacularly awful at revolting, I don't think it would have gone nearly as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Based on that bail summary, I suspect at least one of Bundy's body guards was in fact paid, just it was ol Uncle Sam signing their cheques.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You could just read the countless posts in this thread predicting that was exactly what was going to happen. I am fairly confident that the loudest and most common predictions were that they FBI would wait for this to blow over and nab them at some point in the future, specifically because any confrontation would be too dangerous and ignite a blood bath. The FBI ended up directly confronting them, which is what a lot of the people were calling for in the first place, only to be labeled "blood thirsty".
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You could just read the countless posts in this thread predicting that was exactly what was going to happen. There is a difference between armchair projections and actual reality. There is a lot of ways this could have gone very wrong, right up to the very last minute of this. What if one of the guys threatening BLM employees had decided to take it a step further? What if the final 4 had gotten into a shootout with the FBI rather than be taken alive? I agree that the FBI handled it incredibly well, and that this situation ultimately worked out great in the end with a huge pile of charges to hit everyone with, but people could have died, here. They did not take the threat the Bundy family posed seriously and the end result was the occupation of a federal building, threats of violence against civilian public employees, and millions of dollars in public expenditures. The fact that they were able to prevent the worst from happening shouldn't overshadow the fact that federal authorities' inaction is what lead to this in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:What a meaningful contribution to the thread. Yes I saw your point and accurately characterized it, if it's a poor contribution to the thread you should probably look inward. This thread: "x is going to happen, waiting for it's the smart move" "no it isn't, the FBI is just racist/rightwing and won't do anything!" *x happens, flawless victory by FBI* "man the FBI got so lucky x happened, no one could have ever seen that coming, waiting was so stupid"
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Yes I saw your point and accurately characterized it, if it's a poor contribution to the thread you should probably look inward. You know you could end this debate once and for all by linking the posts that prove this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:Well, I'm convinced, they really did make the place better. All it needed was a nice trench of human feces. Yeah, no real federal park is complete without a poo poo ditch
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:What a meaningful contribution to the thread. Basically this. The FBI was absolutely amazing at capitalizing on the terrorists' mistakes, but had they decided to start enforcing their "hung by the neck until dead" faux court orders or decided to go out swinging the bodycount would have been a lot worse before the situation could be contained. None of us knows (  ) what the overall strategy was or what assets were in place (if any), but from an outsider perspective they were playing it dangerously fast and loose the first few weeks.Edit: way beaten. But we've hashed and rehashed this argument n times over; there's no definitive answer unless the FBI is transparent with how they handled this situation (spoiler: they will never reveal the OAquinas fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:22
|
|